3 a) To apply the ruling of the court in its judgment on interpretation of the judgment on merits “regarding the meaning and scope of the declaration of ineffectiveness of Laws Nº 26479 and [Nº]26492”; b) To initiate the procedure to include “the most suitable legal classification” to define the crime of extra-judicial executions, within 30 days of the date the agreement was signed”; c) To initiate “the procedure to sign and promote ratification of the Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity, [...] within 30 days of the date the agreement was signed”; d) To publish the judgment of the Court in the official gazette El Peruano, and to disseminate its content through other media “deemed appropriate for that purpose, within 30 days from the date the agreement was signed”; e) To include in the Supreme Resolution ordering publication of the agreement, “a public expression of apology to the victims for the grave damages caused” and ratification of the determination not to allow this type of event to occur again; and f) To erect a memorial within 60 days of the date the agreement was signed. 6. To require that the State publish through a radio station, a television channel, and a newspaper, all of them with national coverage, an announcement stating that the next of kin of Tito Ricardo Ramírez Alberto, Odar Mender (or Méndez) Sifuentes Nuñez, and Benedicta Yanque Churo, [were] being sought to grant them reparation in connection with the facts in the instant case. Said publication [to] be made for at least 3 non-consecutive days, within 30 days after notice of [the] judgment [was] served, according to the provisions of paragraphs 31 and 32 of the latter. 7. That the State of Peru must submit to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights a report on fulfillment of the reparations within six months of the date that notice of [the] judgment is served. 8. That it w[ould] monitor fulfillment of the obligations set forth in [the] judgment and it w[ould] only close the instant case once the State of Peru ha[d] faithfully complied with the provisions set forth in [the] judgment. 3. The brief of March 27, 2002, in which the State of Peru (hereinafter “the State” or “Peru”) forwarded a copy of the “Minutes relating to the addendum to the agreement on integral reparation in the Barrios Altos case.” 4. The brief of May 9, 2002, in which the Embassy of Peru in Costa Rica forwarded Report No. 39-2002-JUS/CNDH-SE and its attachments, prepared by the Executive Secretariat of the National Human Rights Council (CNDH) of the Ministry of Justice of Peru, which “describes the measures taken by the Peruvian State to comply with the judgment on reparations of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 30, 2001, in the Barrios Altos case.” 5. The brief of June 17, 2002, in which the Embassy of Peru in Costa Rica forwarded Report No. 48-2002-JUS/CNDH-SE and its attachments, prepared by the Executive Secretariat of the National Human Rights Council (CNDH) of the Ministry of Justice of Peru, which “describes compliance with [...] the pecuniary reparations granted to the next of kin and/or the victims in the Barrios Altos case.” 6. The brief of July 30, 2002, in which the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Commission” or “the Inter-American Commission”) forwarded the comments (unsigned) of the National Human Rights Coordinator